REPORT LINKS HERBICIDE EXPOSURE TO ILLNESSES AMONG VIETNAM VETS.

For more than a decade Vietnam veterans have sought compensation
for illnesses they believe were caused by their wartime exposure
to herbicides, which were used heavily during the war to
defoliate the jungle, to reduce available cover for enemy troops.
U.S. soldiers and airmen who prepared, handled or sprayed the
herbicides, and ground troops who were doused, have been
routinely denied compensation by the federal Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) because the VA has taken the position that
there is not enough scientific evidence linking herbicide
exposure to disease.

Now an independent scientific review sponsored by the American
Legion, the Vietnam Veterans of America, and the National
Veterans Legal Services Project has concluded that there is a
"significant statistical association" between exposure to
chemical herbicides and several serious illnesses. According to
the April, 1990, report of the Agent Orange Scientific Task
Force, there is "a significant statistical association" between
exposure to the herbicide Agent Orange and various cancers
(non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and soft tissue sarcomas), serious skin
disorders (chloracne), and liver disorders. The Task Force said,
"The aggregate interpretation of several sound studies showing a
statistically significant association for each of these
conditions makes this conclusion inescapable." Agent Orange was
the military code name for the chemical herbicide used most often
in Vietnam to defoliate the jungle. Agent Orange was a
chlorinated phenoxy herbicide made up of two common weed killers,
2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, both of which are routinely contaminated with
dioxins during manufacture. Anyone exposed to Agent Orange is
presumed to have been exposed to dioxins.

When a scientist says there is a "significant statistical
association" between one event (such as exposure to an herbicide)
and another event (such as the onset of illness), he or she means
it is very unlikely that the two events occurred together by
random chance; it is much more likely that the two events
occurred together for a reason. (What is meant by "very unlikely"
differs from study to study; often "very unlikely" means there is
less than a 5% probability that the observed relationship
occurred by random chance; sometimes "very unlikely" means there
was less than a 1% probability that the observed relationship
occurred by random chance. In each individual study, the author
decides which definition of "very unlikely" he or she will use.)

The 1990 report is based on a review of 285 different published
studies of human exposure to phenoxy herbicides and/or dioxins,
all appearing in scientific journals from 1978 onward. The 285
studies are listed on pages 49-75 of the 1990 report; the list
provides a unique resource for anyone seeking additional
information on phenoxy herbicide effects on humans. The VA does
not allow consideration of animal studies, so only human data
were evaluated for the 1990 report. However, to make the point
that animal studies are universally recognized as valid evidence
for human cancer risk, the 1990 report contains an appendix in
which various scientists and government agencies are quoted
saying that animal studies provide valid evidence for those
trying to understand human cancers in relation to chemical
exposures. This appendix (pgs. 42-48 of the 1990 report) is a
unique resource for citizens trying to make the case that animal
studies should be heeded in public policy decisions involving
human exposure to chemicals.

The 1990 report concludes further that three additional health
effects "are at least as likely as not" to be associated with
exposure to phenoxy herbicides: Hodgkin's disease (a cancerous
enlargement of the lymph nodes, spleen, and general lymphoid
tissues, which usually appears first in the neck), neurologic
effects, and reproductive and developmental disorders.

The observed reproductive and developmental disorders include (a)
low sperm count among Vietnam vets compared to a control group of
non-Vietnam veterans; (b) increased incidence of spontaneous
abortion among wives of Vietnam vets; (c) increased incidence of
birth defects in children of Vietnam vets, including skin
defects, nerve defects, heart defects, kidney defects, and oral
clefts (cleft lip and cleft palate).

The conclusion that these illnesses are "at least as likely as
not" to occur from Agent Orange exposure is important within the
VA because the VA's rules for compensation require a finding that
a disease is "as likely as not" to occur from a chemical exposure
before that disease becomes compensable.

The report concludes further that there is "sound scientific
evidence of an association with exposure to agent orange, but the
evidence does not reach the level of formal statistical
significance for the following additional effects:" cancers of
the kidney, testicles, stomach, prostate, colon, hepatobiliary
tract (liver and related systems), brain, and blood-forming cells
(leukemia); psychosocial effects; immune system disorders;
gastrointestinal ulcers; and altered lipid metabolism (the body's
ability to digest and handle fats and some oils).

This is an important report because the issue of compensation for
Vietnam vets is merely the tip of an enormous iceberg. The
components of agent orange (2,4,5-T and 2,4-D) are both still
widely used in the United States for clearing rights of way
beneath power lines and along highways; rain then carries the
chemicals into water supplies. Many homeowners use these
chemicals (knowingly or not) to kill lawn "pests" (broad-leaf
plants such as crab grass and dandelions). Farmers use them
extensively for weed control. Thus exposure to these chemicals is
very widespread among the American people.

Since the 1990 report appeared (in April), the VA has reversed
itself and declared that soft tissue sarcomas and non-Hodgkin's
lymphomas in Vietnam vets are compensable. The VA's Advisory
Committee on Environmental Hazards continues to study the
relationship of other diseases to Agent Orange exposures among
vets.